Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Ottomans-French alliance

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Ottomans-French alliance
    Posted: 20-Apr-2007 at 16:04
Yes It is yaramaz. What a funny name for a ship. Maybe They named it as yaramaz because He is tinny(Yaramaz is used for childs.)LOL
Back to Top
erkut View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
Persona non Grata

Joined: 18-Feb-2006
Location: T.R.N.C.
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 965
  Quote erkut Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2007 at 18:02
(Jarramas)Yaramaz means naughty. (Jilderim)Yıldırım means lightning.
Those ships were copies of Ottoman ships actually.
 
this is the plan of first Jarramas:
(Architectura Navalis Mercatoria (1768) )
 
 
and this could be intresting for turkish members: http://burkinafasafiso.com/category/tarih/
 


Edited by erkut - 20-Apr-2007 at 18:04
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2810
  Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Apr-2007 at 06:09
Originally posted by Mortaza

Yes It is yaramaz. What a funny name for a ship. Maybe They named it as yaramaz because He is tinny(Yaramaz is used for childs.)LOL
 
During the same era there was also the venerable HMS Sllan Vrre ("Seldom Worse"), Snll ("Nice"), Tva Litet (roughly "Dawdles a bit") and Nsvis ("Impertinent"). LOL
The ships of the archipelago fleet had a tendency to be renamed to such pet names after their characteristics: for example the Seldom Worse was originally Thor.
 
Originally posted by erkut

(Jarramas)Yaramaz means naughty. (Jilderim)Yıldırım means lightning.
Those ships were copies of Ottoman ships actually.
 
this is the plan of first Jarramas:
(Architectura Navalis Mercatoria (1768) )
 
 
and this could be intresting for turkish members: http://burkinafasafiso.com/category/tarih/
 
As far as I know the only Turkish about those particular ships were the name. The Illerim and Vita rn (and later the first Jarramas) had their predecessor in the light privateers that Sweden relied on in the Atlantic during the Great Northern War, and are by many considered to be the first frigates. Those plans is actually the second Jarramas, designed by Gilbert Sheldon (of English descent) and built in 1759.
 
What is the article about? It looks interesting.Smile
 
On the other hand, Fredrik af Chapman took much inspiration from the Turkish ships when he designed the archipelago frigates of the latter part of the 18th century. For example this sketch of an early Turuma. 
 
 
 
edit: sorry for stealing the topic.
 


Edited by Styrbiorn - 28-Apr-2007 at 06:20
Back to Top
pekau View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Atlantean Prophet

Joined: 08-Oct-2006
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3335
  Quote pekau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Apr-2007 at 14:49
Just to mention the possibility...
 
France would try to push for Italy and even Spain, while the Ottoman Empire would make sure that France do not get involved with Ottoman Empire' invasion to the Balkans and some North African lands.
 
 
     
   
Join us.
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Imperial Ambassador

Joined: 06-May-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144
  Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Apr-2007 at 17:35
Originally posted by pekau

Just to mention the possibility...
 
France would try to push for Italy and even Spain, while the Ottoman Empire would make sure that France do not get involved with Ottoman Empire' invasion to the Balkans and some North African lands.
 
 
 
France and Ottomans had common enemy - Habsburgs.
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358
  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 07:25
Originally posted by pekau

Just to mention the possibility...
 
France would try to push for Italy and even Spain, while the Ottoman Empire would make sure that France do not get involved with Ottoman Empire' invasion to the Balkans and some North African lands.
 
 
 
its ironic you say this, it is an interesting idea, but unserving to the interests of both states and impossible considering the french diplomatic situation.

barbarossa hayreddin pasa, the greatest admiral in ottoman history, was the chief of the ottoman navy during the reign of suleyman the magnificent, which was when the french-ottoman alliance was created. the french king francis requested ottoman assistance in the mediterannean, as the french barely had a navy, whereas the ottoman navy at the time was supreme (excluding perhaps admiral yo-sun shin of korea who around that time was crushing a japanese invasion). today, the mediterannean cities of marseille and nice are french, and this is because barbarossa bombarded those cities from the sea and forced them to surrender on behalf of the french king francis.
 
whats ironic about your suggestion though is, as barbarossa and his huge navy of 210 warships were sailing from the barbary coast to france, they bypassed and successfully beseiged an italian city. with this new territorial acquisition rome itself was vulnerable and likely to be captured. it seemed barbarossa would begin an invasion of the city when the french interfered and save their fellow catholics.
 
so you see, as all nations create alliances for their own benefit and interests, the french benefit was protection from the ottoman navy saving them from the italian and spanish threats, while they could focus their miltary power on the hapsburg and english threats. whilst they wanted protection from their mediterannean threats, they did not want spain and the italian city states destroyed as it would result in complete ottoman naval supremacy, which would ultimately become detrimental to their interests.
 
barborossa spent thirty years subduing and humiliating combined spanish and italian fleets in the mediteranean, his highlight being the batle of preveza. he spent almost his entire career bombarding coastal cities of non-ottoman states.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 07:33
what did the ottomans get out of the alliance at this time then?
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358
  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 08:42
french perfume LOL
 
 
as a result of this alliance, the ottomans had even more power in europe and an ally against the hapsurgs. not only that, their alliance caused the english, who had a fierce rivalry with the french, to begin trade and communication with the empire which proved beneficial. the french began trade with the ottoman empire too.
Back to Top
pekau View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Atlantean Prophet

Joined: 08-Oct-2006
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3335
  Quote pekau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 18:45
Originally posted by Majkes

Originally posted by pekau

Just to mention the possibility...
 
France would try to push for Italy and even Spain, while the Ottoman Empire would make sure that France do not get involved with Ottoman Empire' invasion to the Balkans and some North African lands.
 
 
 
France and Ottomans had common enemy - Habsburgs.
 
Weakening Habsburg too much would not be good. Russians would expand through the weakened Austria-Hungary. Stronger Russia is not a good news for any other players, especially the Turks.
 
I am not sure how Prussians would have reacted. They were never eager with expanding until Bismarck came in...
 
Since you (kurt) said that Turkish navy was supreme, do they have a chance agains the Royal Navy? I know Britain dominated the sea for long time, but I don't know if Turks were better at that time...
 
 
     
   
Join us.
Back to Top
pekau View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Atlantean Prophet

Joined: 08-Oct-2006
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3335
  Quote pekau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 18:47
Originally posted by kurt

french perfume LOL
 
 
 
I think it's a great idea. French skill with perfume with great skills of the East (Turks and beyond east) might have changed the perfume industry today. Out of the topic, but have anyone watched the movie, Perfume: The Story of A Murderer? I found the plot to be interesting... but I want to know if it's worth watching...
     
   
Join us.
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 19:46
Originally posted by pekau

 
Weakening Habsburg too much would not be good. Russians would expand through the weakened Austria-Hungary. Stronger Russia is not a good news for any other players, especially the Turks.
 
I am not sure how Prussians would have reacted. They were never eager with expanding until Bismarck came in...
 
Since you (kurt) said that Turkish navy was supreme, do they have a chance agains the Royal Navy? I know Britain dominated the sea for long time, but I don't know if Turks were better at that time...
 
 
Franco-Ottoman alliance lasted between 16th-17th centuries.
 
The context you are mentioning is 19th century. By that time, France became an enemy to the Ottoman Empire with some temporary exceptions like alliance against Russia between 1806-12 and Crimean War(French actions against Ottoman Empire in 19th century: 1798-Napoleon's invasion of Egypt, 1827 French support to the independence of Greece and burning of the Ottoman navy in Navarino, 1830-annexation of Algeria, 1830s-French support to Mehmed Ali Pasha against Ottoman Empire, 1881- Annexation of Tunisia)


Edited by Kapikulu - 16-May-2007 at 19:49
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 19:56
Wo wo wo, everybody sounds a bit confused here.
 
@ pekau Weakening Habsburg too much would not be good. Russians would expand
"Russia" as such did not really exist in the early 16th century. They were far from being a threat to the Ottomans who only started to feel the pressure of our moujik friends some 150 years latter.

through the weakened Austria-Hungary.
Similarly Austria-Hungary did not exist. Most of Hungary was actually under Ottoman rule. The house of Habsburg would remain united till 1557, when Charles V's heritage was divided between his son (who got Spain, America, Italy and the Low Countries) and his brother (who got the Imperial crown and the family lands in Austria).

I am not sure how Prussians would have reacted.
I know: they wouldn't have because Prussia did not exist at the time as a polity. The Brandbourg was merely one of the most important state within the Empire but far behind Bavaria for instance.

They were never eager with expanding until Bismarck came in...
Yeah right and in Waterloo or in the Zollverein they were just playing cricket.

Since you (kurt) said that Turkish navy was supreme,
In the Mediterranean there was no country to come close to match the Turkish navy. Genoese crew were better, Maltese soldiers outcompete any opposition, the Spanish galleys had the best artillery and Venice had the best shipyards but between the sheer number of the public and private fleets based in the East (Istanbul and Alexandria mainly) and the witt and skills of the Barbary corsairs, the Turks were just too strong.
Although the Portuguese had proved that on the Oceans, the Turkish galleys would easily be defeated by high board ships, in the Mediterranean they did rule the waves.

do they have a chance agains the Royal Navy? I know Britain dominated the sea for long time, but I don't know if Turks were better at that time...
Basically British warships were a few ill-equiped galleys, merchantmen transformed for the occasion and a few real warships. Henry VIII is usually said to have created the great RN, but it rested more on the excellency of the seamen that on anything else. Broadly speaking, before Cromwell there is not such a thing as a British navy, there are only good sailors and courageous corsairs. Some 120 years laters, the British warships were to be able to threat to bomb Topkapi.
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
pekau View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Atlantean Prophet

Joined: 08-Oct-2006
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3335
  Quote pekau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 20:22
Heh, wrong time. Um... ops?
 
Didn't Prussia came to fight in Waterloo because of Napoleon's threat? Napoleon invaded and conquered Prussia. They don't want Napoleon to conquer them again... As for Zollverein... I have no clue what that is.
 
I thought Prussians weren't really into expansion because of how they tried to prevent the German unification and how they avoided the lands from being Germanized by giving them to Austria-Hungary.
     
   
Join us.
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-May-2007 at 20:46
Sorry I should have mention Frederik die Gro instead of Waterloo and he and his father weren't into expansion, what is?
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358
  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-May-2007 at 23:28

like maharbbal said, russia was not a factor in europeon diplomacy during the 16th and 17th centuries, they were just a bunch of prinicipalities which were endlessly raided by the crimean khanate. hardly a threat. by the time russia became a threat to ottoman existance, in the 19th century, france had ruined their traditional alliance with the ottomans in napoleons invasion of egypt.

i should have specified where the turkish navy was supreme. the black sea and the aegean sea were virtually ottoman lakes. the mediteranean was more or less theirs for about 2 centuries after the battle of preveza (1538), and when their fleet was destroyed by united christian forces in 1571, they rebuilt their fleet in six months and re-asserted their naval invincibility in the mediteranean. the sultan even said, after the supposedly disastrous defeat: "you have merely cut off our beards, and the shaven beard grows faster". their chief rivals in the mediteranean were venice, genoa, spain, and other italian city states, all of whom united against the turks to maintain their otherwise threatened presence in the mediteranean.

however, they could not contend with portuguese incursions into the persian gulf and the red sea. in 1560, an ottoman fleet was defeated by a portuguese fleet in the indian ocean. hence ottoman presence in the indian ocean and their security over the persian gulf and the red sea was ended. ottoman ships simply weren't able to contend with oceanic waters. although they did manage to explore as far as newfoundland, greenland and iceland, though for non-military purposes.
 
in the 16th century the british navy would have been ruined by the ottoman fleet, but after the industrial revolution the ottoman navy was useless. sultan abdulaziz spent a fortune on building a huge navy, only for it to be rendered backwards due to the industrial revolution. they lost many naval battles to the russians, including the battle of sinop of the crimean war.
 
to summarise, for about 2-3 centuries the ottomans ruled the mediterannean, but they had no interest in the oceans, and eventually europeon powers exceeded them technologically, resulting in a decline in naval power.
Back to Top
Yiannis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
  Quote Yiannis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2007 at 08:30
Originally posted by kurt

to summarise, for about 2-3 centuries the ottomans ruled the mediterannean, but they had no interest in the oceans, and eventually europeon powers exceeded them technologically, resulting in a decline in naval power.
 
There're other factors as well. After the discovery of the Americas, European focus shifted irreversibly towards the west and the Mediterranean was not an important sea-route any more. Since the Ottomans controlled Middle East, cutting trade roots from the Indies, there was no point for them to control the Mediterranean.
 
That is when also Venice declined, since it was depended on trade and trade was no longer possible for them. The new trade roots were now to the West and around Africa to the East.
 
 
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics

Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2007 at 20:11
Originally posted by Yiannis

 
There're other factors as well. After the discovery of the Americas, European focus shifted irreversibly towards the west and the Mediterranean was not an important sea-route any more. Since the Ottomans controlled Middle East, cutting trade roots from the Indies, there was no point for them to control the Mediterranean.
 
That is when also Venice declined, since it was depended on trade and trade was no longer possible for them. The new trade roots were now to the West and around Africa to the East.
 
 
 
True...Not only related to Mediterranean, also the establishment of new oceanic routes brought the decline of Silk Road and Spice Road, which were the most important trade routes before. The control of these roads' western portion belonged to Ottoman Empire...And Venetian traders were using it actively for centuries...Not only the Venetians, but Genoese as well...So they faded altogether..Ottoman Empire's vast lands and huge power helped empire stay a bit tight for more time, but Venice and Genoa faded away from scene of Europe as important powers sooner.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358
  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2007 at 07:32
Originally posted by Majkes

Can You name other important alliance during XVIth, XVIIth Centuries and its reasons? We can also discuss French Ottomans alliance but it was of course mainly based on anti Habsburgs feelings. We can also discuss which in You opinions alliances would be god for You countries and what do You think about decisions of Your kings to establish one alliance and not the other.
 
- ottoman - dutch alliance, although im not sure where this one begins and ends.
- portuguese - persian alliance
- spanish, venetian, genoese, and other italian city states, form the holy league, to end ottoman naval supremacy in the mediterranean
- holy alliance - russia, austria, poland, venice, and the holy roman empire. this force destroyed the ottomans at vienna, but prior to this they struggled to take territory from the ottomans (they besieged Buda 16 times in a space of one hundred and fifty years)
- russian austrian alliance, 18th century, to reduce ottoman power. ended after the crimean war.
- mughal - ottoman alliance
- english portuguese alliance
- austrian prussian alliance, after austria lost a war to prussia they realised they were too diplomatically isolated, and created this alliance which ended after world war one.
-english french alliance, beginning with the crimean war, continuing right on with world war two.
- sweden - ottomans, anti-russian alliance.
 
so on and so forth. there are others, its just they dont fit in early modern and the imperial age.
Back to Top
kurt View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358
  Quote kurt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2007 at 07:42
Originally posted by Yiannis

Originally posted by kurt

to summarise, for about 2-3 centuries the ottomans ruled the mediterannean, but they had no interest in the oceans, and eventually europeon powers exceeded them technologically, resulting in a decline in naval power.
 
There're other factors as well. After the discovery of the Americas, European focus shifted irreversibly towards the west and the Mediterranean was not an important sea-route any more.
 
 
 
good point. although the mediteranean did indeed become important again after suez canal was built
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2007 at 16:50
Originally posted by kurt

- russian austrian alliance, 18th century, to reduce ottoman power. ended after the crimean war.
 
This one ended much before. The last battle between Austrian Empire and Ottoman Empire was in 1791.
 
Originally posted by kurt

-english french alliance, beginning with the crimean war, continuing right on with world war two.
 
Things were not always friendly between Britain and France between Crimean War and WW I... The official date shows Entente Cordiale, 1907 for this alliance. And due to evergoing competition with France overseas and historical hostilities, it is not until the rise of Germany Britain and France agreed for an alliance.
 
[/
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.